still loving it
i dont need to upgrade anything when i can pick between the classes
Halo Reach has Absolutely NO!!! Staying Power!!!!!!
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="h575309"][QUOTE="Eggimannd"]This is just a case of you getting owned though. If you have the jump on somebody and halo and dont win, its because you werent using your grenades right. I would never use a grenade on a guy I have the advantage on :P But yeah that's just sloppy play on your part, or a nice move on their part. Listen if you got the jump on them, and they pulled a good enough grenade bounce(because 9 times out of 10 you're going to over shoot that grenade) and then popped you in the face. It's fair game that he got you. Most of the times if you get the jump on someone you should be able to kill them. Hell melee, face shot, teabag(what you know you do it)Personally this is one of the aspects I hate the most about Halo. I can't count the number of times already in Reach where I had the jump and I completely felt like I dominated the guy and got only HS yet for some reason he was able to live through, turn and wtf own me from full hp. It's incredibly annoying at times.
jg4xchamp
Its all dependent on the situation of course. If you come up behind someone and start shooting them with the AR, only to have them turn around and bluck you with a shotgun, your gonna say to yourself "Gee I should have maybe thrown a grenade there". But grenades are a vital part in getting out of jams. I dont know how many times ive been shot up, turn a corner, thrown a grenade into a corner only to have a guy walk right into it, giving me an easy kill.
You missing, and blundering a golden opportunity isn't exactly random either as much as it's just sloppy play :? Besides controlled bursts down that shield quick, grenades, and you always have your armor ability for an advantage. Or if they have their back turned to you, don't even shoot. Sprint up, melee(for a quick kill) or if you want to show off assassinate them.[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="Eggimannd"]
It has more to do with that it takes so many freaking shots to kill someone in this game. So if the guy moves a little and I miss that 1 little extra HS I needed to take that dumb armor off him, he might turn around and own me. Which I find completely ridiculous and nothing to do with skills or not.
Eggimannd
I'm not missing. I'm just not used to having to shoot a guy like 4 times with the DRM just to get his freaking armor off and then HS to kill him.
Halo has it's own unique play styIe. I guess you have to get used to it if you want to enjoy playing it :).
Oh I love the fluidity of MW. I wish Halo and Killzone would tone down visually and focus more for the 60 frames(but then it would have that ugly MW look lol). Plus I kind of want Sprint standard and not an AA for Halo, but that's neither here nor there. I think plenty of shooters have their brand of adaptive playstyIes, but MW lost me with perks(I just hate this concept all together), and Kill streak rewards(see other rant haha). I think the closest I've come to liking perks is the stuff Battlefield has done and Killzone's badges. Killzone 3 in my opinion is already doing it better. This time I don't have to work to unlock the other cIasses I want to play as. It's going strictly to a cIass driven experience from the get go. Which is a smarter move in my opinion. Yeah I see. And thank you! A Halo player that agrees with sprint being standard. I caught some flak for suggesting that in the Reach thread lol. I would significantly speed up the gameplay, not that the pace of the game bothers me, but sometimes I wish I could traverse certain maps faster. Besides its like hilarious how sprint is technology for spartans. Like really? you guys can build a giant laser, but your armor makes it so you can only run sometimes. Also why is he having breathing problems? He's a spartan? They should not be fat and out of shape. I know the last line of thinking is silly, but the whole concept of sprint as an armor ability is honestly kind of dumb :P Sprint as a standard ability, with the other stuff as your armor for the pseudo cIass based thing would have been an even better route. It's not bad by any means now(I love it), but a faster game would have made it that much better.[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="Episode_Eve"]The great thing about COD is that it offers more styIes of gameplay than most shooters. I recognize this, even though I don't play it. You can play as a 'run and gunner' and be successful. You can play as a 'camper' and be successful. It does reward reflexes greatly. It also gives you the tools to be tactical, if you or your team decided to do so. Not to mention the actual control mechanics such as prone, crawl, sprinting, and platforming (something most shooters don't have), this allows a good player to escape and traverse the levels with ease when he needs to.
Also, check out my edited post above.
Episode_Eve
[QUOTE="Eggimannd"]
[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] You missing, and blundering a golden opportunity isn't exactly random either as much as it's just sloppy play :? Besides controlled bursts down that shield quick, grenades, and you always have your armor ability for an advantage. Or if they have their back turned to you, don't even shoot. Sprint up, melee(for a quick kill) or if you want to show off assassinate them. Episode_Eve
I'm not missing. I'm just not used to having to shoot a guy like 4 times with the DRM just to get his freaking armor off and then HS to kill him.
Halo has it's own unique play styIe. I guess you have to get used to it if you want to enjoy playing it :).Ya. That's why I'm not a huge fun of the multi. I'm having fun with Reach online but it's quickly dropping and I don't think I'll be playing for much longer.
I'm much too used to Counter-Strike where it's really just pure skill and Headshots usually = to death 100% sure. Not used to having to shoot someone down so much just to get a single kill.
[QUOTE="Episode_Eve"]Yeah I see. And thank you! A Halo player that agrees with sprint being standard. I caught some flak for suggesting that in the Reach thread lol. I would significantly speed up the gameplay, not that the pace of the game bothers me, but sometimes I wish I could traverse certain maps faster. Besides its like hilarious how sprint is technology for spartans. Like really? you guys can build a giant laser, but your armor makes it so you can only run sometimes. Also why is he having breathing problems? He's a spartan? They should not be fat and out of shape. I know the last line of thinking is silly, but the whole concept of sprint as an armor ability is honestly kind of dumb :P Sprint as a standard ability, with the other stuff as your armor for the pseudo cIass based thing would have been an even better route. It's not bad by any means now(I love it), but a faster game would have made it that much better. I agree with everything you said. I can't help but laugh and poke fun at Spartans running out of breath lol.[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] Oh I love the fluidity of MW. I wish Halo and Killzone would tone down visually and focus more for the 60 frames(but then it would have that ugly MW look lol). Plus I kind of want Sprint standard and not an AA for Halo, but that's neither here nor there. I think plenty of shooters have their brand of adaptive playstyIes, but MW lost me with perks(I just hate this concept all together), and Kill streak rewards(see other rant haha). I think the closest I've come to liking perks is the stuff Battlefield has done and Killzone's badges. Killzone 3 in my opinion is already doing it better. This time I don't have to work to unlock the other cIasses I want to play as. It's going strictly to a cIass driven experience from the get go. Which is a smarter move in my opinion. jg4xchamp
Edit: Is it me, or is the campaign speed faster than competitive? You jog faster and sprint is just a bit faster. I would prefer that in competitive!
[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="Eggimannd"]
That's stupid. What if I don't have any nades left?
I'm not great at the game but I just feel that in Reach sometimes **** gets way too random when it shouldn't. Armor is dumb.
You don't need a grenade, but if he caught you off guard and grenade/headshotted you than how is unfair or random? that was poor on your part. If you have the jump, than there is no real reason to lose outside of him having an advantage you didn't see coming or you failed to finish the job. The armor is fine(especially since you have one as well) it's a matter of using your weapons, knowing your map correctly. I'm not saying there aren't aspects of Halo that are frustrating, but that's a rather weak example.I don't know of any other FPS I've played that takes as many shots to kill someone as it does in Halo. How is that a weak example?
It just comes down to learning the nuances of Halo. Its hard to understand unless youve played alot but any experienced Halo player who is at a disadvantage due to another player having a jump on them will do their darndest to hide behind something so you cant hit them or lead you into a trap with a grenade in order to turn the tides. The person who has the advantage needs to know when to be aggressive and when to pull back.I'll just respond to the first post.
I don't think an upgrading system like Call of Duty's is the one thing that decides weather a game has staying power or not. After all, Halo 3 was the most played game on Live for the years of 2007, 2008 and 2009 and it had no upgrading system, period. Yeah, it gives the player more incentive if they have something more significant to work toward, but how fun the game is the biggest part of a game's staying power and Reach is plenty fun.
Besides, even if you don't have guns and perks to grind away at it's not like theres a shortage of things to do. You have match making and it's wealth of varying playlists, theres fire fight, campaign co-op, the forge map editor, custom games, daily and weekly challenges, commendations, theater mode and file sharing.
You missing, and blundering a golden opportunity isn't exactly random either as much as it's just sloppy play :? Besides controlled bursts down that shield quick, grenades, and you always have your armor ability for an advantage. Or if they have their back turned to you, don't even shoot. Sprint up, melee(for a quick kill) or if you want to show off assassinate them.[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="Eggimannd"]
It has more to do with that it takes so many freaking shots to kill someone in this game. So if the guy moves a little and I miss that 1 little extra HS I needed to take that dumb armor off him, he might turn around and own me. Which I find completely ridiculous and nothing to do with skills or not.
Eggimannd
I'm not missing. I'm just not used to having to shoot a guy like 4 times with the DRM just to get his freaking armor off and then HS to kill him.
Than how is that necessarily the games fault? I wouldn't go into Modern Warfare and running around as if I had a big shield keeping my alive. You adapt to the styIe of play. Halo it's get rid of the shield first, and then put your enemy on the ground. DMR isn't even 5 headshots at this point, I think it's just 4 shots anywhere for the shield, and the headshot for the quick kill(if the shield is down, the chest shot won't kill in one shot, but that much was obvious with the health system) Again there really is no real reason outside of a mistake on your part that he's going to turn around and kill you, and you always have other tools at your disposal. grenades, if you can get close melee, or your armor ability to be that trump card if needed.[QUOTE="Eggimannd"][QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] You don't need a grenade, but if he caught you off guard and grenade/headshotted you than how is unfair or random? that was poor on your part. If you have the jump, than there is no real reason to lose outside of him having an advantage you didn't see coming or you failed to finish the job. The armor is fine(especially since you have one as well) it's a matter of using your weapons, knowing your map correctly. I'm not saying there aren't aspects of Halo that are frustrating, but that's a rather weak example. h575309
I don't know of any other FPS I've played that takes as many shots to kill someone as it does in Halo. How is that a weak example?
It just comes down to learning the nuances of Halo. Its hard to understand unless youve played alot but any experienced Halo player who is at a disadvantage due to another player having a jump on them will do their darndest to hide behind something so you cant hit them or lead you into a trap with a grenade in order to turn the tides. The person who has the advantage needs to know when to be aggressive and when to pull back. Yeah the whole turn, left, bounce grenade off wall, turn and watch as grenade explodes(and their shield goes bye bye) and then pop in the face is the cIassic "gotta save my ass" move :P[QUOTE="Episode_Eve"]Yeah I see. And thank you! A Halo player that agrees with sprint being standard. I caught some flak for suggesting that in the Reach thread lol. I would significantly speed up the gameplay, not that the pace of the game bothers me, but sometimes I wish I could traverse certain maps faster. Besides its like hilarious how sprint is technology for spartans. Like really? you guys can build a giant laser, but your armor makes it so you can only run sometimes. Also why is he having breathing problems? He's a spartan? They should not be fat and out of shape. I know the last line of thinking is silly, but the whole concept of sprint as an armor ability is honestly kind of dumb :P Sprint as a standard ability, with the other stuff as your armor for the pseudo cIass based thing would have been an even better route. It's not bad by any means now(I love it), but a faster game would have made it that much better. It's all game mechanics. They try to balance out the armor abilities. Of course spartans can sprint for long durations, but it wouldn't be fair if that were the case in gameplay for the other armor abilities. And the heavy breathing is to tip off players near by that the sprinting player might be trying to sneek up on.[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] Oh I love the fluidity of MW. I wish Halo and Killzone would tone down visually and focus more for the 60 frames(but then it would have that ugly MW look lol). Plus I kind of want Sprint standard and not an AA for Halo, but that's neither here nor there. I think plenty of shooters have their brand of adaptive playstyIes, but MW lost me with perks(I just hate this concept all together), and Kill streak rewards(see other rant haha). I think the closest I've come to liking perks is the stuff Battlefield has done and Killzone's badges. Killzone 3 in my opinion is already doing it better. This time I don't have to work to unlock the other cIasses I want to play as. It's going strictly to a cIass driven experience from the get go. Which is a smarter move in my opinion. jg4xchamp
[QUOTE="Eggimannd"][QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] You missing, and blundering a golden opportunity isn't exactly random either as much as it's just sloppy play :? Besides controlled bursts down that shield quick, grenades, and you always have your armor ability for an advantage. Or if they have their back turned to you, don't even shoot. Sprint up, melee(for a quick kill) or if you want to show off assassinate them. jg4xchamp
I'm not missing. I'm just not used to having to shoot a guy like 4 times with the DRM just to get his freaking armor off and then HS to kill him.
Than how is that necessarily the games fault? I wouldn't go into Modern Warfare and running around as if I had a big shield keeping my alive. You adapt to the styIe of play. Halo it's get rid of the shield first, and then put your enemy on the ground. DMR isn't even 5 headshots at this point, I think it's just 4 shots anywhere for the shield, and the headshot for the quick kill(if the shield is down, the chest shot won't kill in one shot, but that much was obvious with the health system) Again there really is no real reason outside of a mistake on your part that he's going to turn around and kill you, and you always have other tools at your disposal. grenades, if you can get close melee, or your armor ability to be that trump card if needed.I never said it's the games fault. I just said I don't really like the game style that makes you have to shoot so freaking much to kill someone.
Than how is that necessarily the games fault? I wouldn't go into Modern Warfare and running around as if I had a big shield keeping my alive. You adapt to the styIe of play. Halo it's get rid of the shield first, and then put your enemy on the ground. DMR isn't even 5 headshots at this point, I think it's just 4 shots anywhere for the shield, and the headshot for the quick kill(if the shield is down, the chest shot won't kill in one shot, but that much was obvious with the health system) Again there really is no real reason outside of a mistake on your part that he's going to turn around and kill you, and you always have other tools at your disposal. grenades, if you can get close melee, or your armor ability to be that trump card if needed.[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="Eggimannd"]
I'm not missing. I'm just not used to having to shoot a guy like 4 times with the DRM just to get his freaking armor off and then HS to kill him.
Eggimannd
I never said it's the games fault. I just said I don't really like the game style that makes you have to shoot so freaking much to kill someone.
Oh .....I thought it was a criticism(well it technically is, but more like a value ....ah **** it...my bad :PHalo Reach great game=Check
Halo Reach Great online play=Check
Halo Reach great graphics for open world style=Check
Halo Reach great sound=Check
Ok here is the problem after about 2 weeks it is totally boring. The reason for this is we are so used to games having a good upgrade system and Reach falls short of this. You see it is all cosmetic. Once you find the style you like you will most likely keep the look and not even worry about buying other armor cosmetic upgrades.
You really have no desire to try and keep upgrading. If you could mod you weapons with better power aim or gernades or stuff like that then this would have great staying power as an online shooter. It just offers far to little in comparison to games like COD in this aspect.
I think people are already getting bored of the Halo Reach online and when COD BO drops it's going to take over and be the game that has the staying power.
MortgageMan007
I literally just uploaded this video of some maps I made. Yeah, no staying power. It's just getting started. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXLWvRdxQTg
[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]"Players (24H): 1,977,671" That's nearly 2 million unique players within the past twenty-four hours. Already getting bored, eh? Doesn't look like it.MortgageMan007
Oh I know Halo will always have a big online community it will not be dead like games like KZ 2 or anything. What i'm saying is the games like COD have the better staying power especially over the long haul.
so your saying that halo 3 beating out cod 4 and waw even being 2 years older then them +halo soesnt have staying power? i think halo 3 even beat cod mw2 a few weeks this year. one thing no one can say is that halo doesnt have staying power. hell i could go put in halo 3 right now play it all night and not get bored.[QUOTE="MortgageMan007"][QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]"Players (24H): 1,977,671" That's nearly 2 million unique players within the past twenty-four hours. Already getting bored, eh? Doesn't look like it.monson21502
Oh I know Halo will always have a big online community it will not be dead like games like KZ 2 or anything. What i'm saying is the games like COD have the better staying power especially over the long haul.
so your saying that halo 3 beating out cod 4 and waw even being 2 years older then them +halo soesnt have staying power? i think halo 3 even beat cod mw2 a few weeks this year. one thing no one can say is that halo doesnt have staying power. hell i could go put in halo 3 right now play it all night and not get bored.In 2008 COD4 was more time on the top of xbox live than Halo 3 was i say 8 month vs 3 since GTA 4 was on top 1 month as well,yet Halo some how was the most played games on 2008 was MS playing with the number to make see that Halo 3 was more played.? now this is Major Nelson own data you can find it easy search week by week is not easy but you will see how much more time COD4 was on top of Halo 3,also Halo 3 has been on top of COD4 an Waw but what you forget to say is that for that time MW2 was on top which is a sequel to COD games.
In other words while Halo fans were concentrated just on Halo 3,COD4 and Waw players had already moved to MW2,but many still played the game enough to keep them on the top 5 just after Halo 3 and Halo 3 by the way is just 1 years older than Waw and it came the same year as COD4.
Halo: Reach is dying after a couple of days? I guess dodo eggs are back in season.
[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]Halo Reach dying? That hasn't happend.Halo: Reach is dying after a couple of days? I guess dodo eggs are back in season.
soulitane
Hint: Dodos are extinct.
[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]"Players (24H): 1,977,671" That's nearly 2 million unique players within the past twenty-four hours. Already getting bored, eh? Doesn't look like it.MortgageMan007
Oh I know Halo will always have a big online community it will not be dead like games like KZ 2 or anything. What i'm saying is the games like COD have the better staying power especially over the long haul.
I am sure playing online was for fun, not unlocking cheap perks/weapons.
[QUOTE="monson21502"][QUOTE="MortgageMan007"]
Oh I know Halo will always have a big online community it will not be dead like games like KZ 2 or anything. What i'm saying is the games like COD have the better staying power especially over the long haul.
so your saying that halo 3 beating out cod 4 and waw even being 2 years older then them +halo soesnt have staying power? i think halo 3 even beat cod mw2 a few weeks this year. one thing no one can say is that halo doesnt have staying power. hell i could go put in halo 3 right now play it all night and not get bored.In 2008 COD4 was more time on the top of xbox live than Halo 3 was i say 8 month vs 3 since GTA 4 was on top 1 month as well,yet Halo some how was the most played games on 2008 was MS playing with the number to make see that Halo 3 was more played.? now this is Major Nelson own data you can find it easy search week by week is not easy but you will see how much more time COD4 was on top of Halo 3,also Halo 3 has been on top of COD4 an Waw but what you forget to say is that for that time MW2 was on top which is a sequel to COD games.
In other words while Halo fans were concentrated just on Halo 3,COD4 and Waw players had already moved to MW2,but many still played the game enough to keep them on the top 5 just after Halo 3 and Halo 3 by the way is just 1 years older than Waw and it came the same year as COD4.
do you have any links or data to support that argument?
so your saying that halo 3 beating out cod 4 and waw even being 2 years older then them +halo soesnt have staying power? i think halo 3 even beat cod mw2 a few weeks this year. one thing no one can say is that halo doesnt have staying power. hell i could go put in halo 3 right now play it all night and not get bored.[QUOTE="monson21502"][QUOTE="MortgageMan007"]
Oh I know Halo will always have a big online community it will not be dead like games like KZ 2 or anything. What i'm saying is the games like COD have the better staying power especially over the long haul.
Eltormo
In 2008 COD4 was more time on the top of xbox live than Halo 3 was i say 8 month vs 3 since GTA 4 was on top 1 month as well,yet Halo some how was the most played games on 2008 was MS playing with the number to make see that Halo 3 was more played.? now this is Major Nelson own data you can find it easy search week by week is not easy but you will see how much more time COD4 was on top of Halo 3,also Halo 3 has been on top of COD4 an Waw but what you forget to say is that for that time MW2 was on top which is a sequel to COD games.
In other words while Halo fans were concentrated just on Halo 3,COD4 and Waw players had already moved to MW2,but many still played the game enough to keep them on the top 5 just after Halo 3 and Halo 3 by the way is just 1 years older than Waw and it came the same year as COD4.
With the whole COD 4/ Halo 3 most played idea. Just becuase 1 game was most played for more months does not mean anything. Cod 4 could have have 100 more players for each of those months then halo had 10,000 more players for each of its months on top. COD would win months wise but not overall. (obviously exaggerated but the point still stands)
I played MW2 for about a month. It was exactly the same as MW and it was even more imbalanced (Which is incredible) then the original. Got up to lvl 50ish and couldn't stand the massive twitch gameplay. I also prefer Reach because every enemy has the same possibility to kill you. No weapon upgrades just cosmetic changes. I dont care about the gear and have spent maybe 25k credits and have played over 500 games since launch and every game is fantastic and have yet to be bored. I have a feeling im going to be playing Reach for a very, very long time.
I enjoy doubles arena and 4v4 even though 90% of my teammates are idiots.
[QUOTE="Eltormo"][QUOTE="monson21502"]so your saying that halo 3 beating out cod 4 and waw even being 2 years older then them +halo soesnt have staying power? i think halo 3 even beat cod mw2 a few weeks this year. one thing no one can say is that halo doesnt have staying power. hell i could go put in halo 3 right now play it all night and not get bored.Person0
In 2008 COD4 was more time on the top of xbox live than Halo 3 was i say 8 month vs 3 since GTA 4 was on top 1 month as well,yet Halo some how was the most played games on 2008 was MS playing with the number to make see that Halo 3 was more played.? now this is Major Nelson own data you can find it easy search week by week is not easy but you will see how much more time COD4 was on top of Halo 3,also Halo 3 has been on top of COD4 an Waw but what you forget to say is that for that time MW2 was on top which is a sequel to COD games.
In other words while Halo fans were concentrated just on Halo 3,COD4 and Waw players had already moved to MW2,but many still played the game enough to keep them on the top 5 just after Halo 3 and Halo 3 by the way is just 1 years older than Waw and it came the same year as COD4.
With the whole COD 4/ Halo 3 most played idea. Just becuase 1 game was most played for more months does not mean anything. Cod 4 could have have 100 more players for each of those months then halo had 10,000 more players for each of its months on top. COD would win months wise but not overall. (obviously exaggerated but the point still stands)Yeah that make sence the few intances that Halo 3 was ahead magically it did so by 10,000 when it was 2 weeks ahead and then COD4 would beat it by months,and then Halo came on top 2 more weeks and COD again for more than a month.
Is very clear what MS was doiung with Halo 3 is their cash cow,and they had been know to play with numbers but stats don't lie COD4 beat Halo like 8 months to 3 in 2008 since ther year started considering that COD4 was almots always on top is impossible to think that Halo 3 the few instances that went ahead did so by allot just to be beat a few feeks latter for months again.
With the whole COD 4/ Halo 3 most played idea. Just becuase 1 game was most played for more months does not mean anything. Cod 4 could have have 100 more players for each of those months then halo had 10,000 more players for each of its months on top. COD would win months wise but not overall. (obviously exaggerated but the point still stands)[QUOTE="Person0"][QUOTE="Eltormo"]
In 2008 COD4 was more time on the top of xbox live than Halo 3 was i say 8 month vs 3 since GTA 4 was on top 1 month as well,yet Halo some how was the most played games on 2008 was MS playing with the number to make see that Halo 3 was more played.? now this is Major Nelson own data you can find it easy search week by week is not easy but you will see how much more time COD4 was on top of Halo 3,also Halo 3 has been on top of COD4 an Waw but what you forget to say is that for that time MW2 was on top which is a sequel to COD games.
In other words while Halo fans were concentrated just on Halo 3,COD4 and Waw players had already moved to MW2,but many still played the game enough to keep them on the top 5 just after Halo 3 and Halo 3 by the way is just 1 years older than Waw and it came the same year as COD4.
Eltormo
Yeah that make sence the few intances that Halo 3 was ahead magically it did so by 10,000 when it was 2 weeks ahead and then COD4 would beat it by months,and then Halo came on top 2 more weeks and COD again for more than a month.
Is very clear what MS was doiung with Halo 3 is their cash cow,and they had been know to play with numbers but stats don't lie COD4 beat Halo like 8 months to 3 in 2008 since ther year started considering that COD4 was almots always on top is impossible to think that Halo 3 the few instances that went ahead did so by allot just to be beat a few feeks latter for months again.
Like i said, months ahead dont matter the difference each month matters.I played MW2 for about a month. It was exactly the same as MW and it was even more imbalanced (Which is incredible) then the original. Got up to lvl 50ish and couldn't stand the massive twitch gameplay. I also prefer Reach because every enemy has the same possibility to kill you. No weapon upgrades just cosmetic changes. I dont care about the gear and have spent maybe 25k credits and have played over 500 games since launch and every game is fantastic and have yet to be bored. I have a feeling im going to be playing Reach for a very, very long time.
I enjoy doubles arena and 4v4 even though 90% of my teammates are idiots.
Fizzman
COD4 is not close to MW2 in gameplay,MW2 is much more fast paced,it has a greater level of costumisation and many different things i have both and they are a huge step one from the other and MW2 is superior in pretty much anything to it.
On Halo is quiote the opossite for me having to hit some one 5 times in the head to kill it is a joke,shield just make it harder for rocket camper to be kill,in fact i was just playing a few days ago and a dude was rocket camping,on a part where he was hard to reach,he would hide every time you put some shots into him,and since it shield regen he keep up going,i finally got the dude with a sicky grenade because shooting him was close to impossible.
LOL, upgrade? Do you really think I need that in my games to be able to continue playing them?
What about the FUN gameplay? I don't care about how my spartan looks, I bought only 1 armor piece, I have like 250K credits, I dont use it.
I just want to play the game, and own people, and im pretty sure that will last long after Black Ops is out.
Halo Reach great game=Check
Halo Reach Great online play=Check
Halo Reach great graphics for open world style=Check
Halo Reach great sound=Check
Ok here is the problem after about 2 weeks it is totally boring. The reason for this is we are so used to games having a good upgrade system and Reach falls short of this. You see it is all cosmetic. Once you find the style you like you will most likely keep the look and not even worry about buying other armor cosmetic upgrades.
You really have no desire to try and keep upgrading. If you could mod you weapons with better power aim or gernades or stuff like that then this would have great staying power as an online shooter. It just offers far to little in comparison to games like COD in this aspect.
I think people are already getting bored of the Halo Reach online and when COD BO drops it's going to take over and be the game that has the staying power.
MortgageMan007
Desire to upgrade is totally different from desire to keep playing. If a game is fun, no real gamer would have a care in the world about how many rewards a game gives out as you play. Counter-Strike, TFC, and Unreal Tournament had no play-time rewards, but that hardly kept players for enjoying those games for years, and many other titles fit into that category as well. Being able to upgrade your character is nothing compared to having fun, and Halo: Reach is quite fun.
People still play Halo 1 and Halo 2 on the PC online... Not as much as Halo 3, but there still are...
[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]"Players (24H): 1,977,671" That's nearly 2 million unique players within the past twenty-four hours. Already getting bored, eh? Doesn't look like it.finalstar2007
I doubt that will last tho, Black Ops coming very soon and we all know how popular CoD is
Yup it will beat Halo Reach for about 2 weeks then Reach will stay on top for the next 2 or 3 years :DThat being said, to the TC, Maybe you're bored of it but I was on about 30 minutes ago and there were well over 500k players online, Halo Reach may not have a lasting appeal to some people but it certainly has more staying power then any other console game this gen [notice I said console so don't get upset PC gamers]
Mega fail. Halo Reach will be far more popular than any PS3 game online for years to come. Have you ever looked at bungie.net? They show the numbers, even Halo 3 still has lots of players. Probably more than MAG for example.
[QUOTE="Fizzman"]
I played MW2 for about a month. It was exactly the same as MW and it was even more imbalanced (Which is incredible) then the original. Got up to lvl 50ish and couldn't stand the massive twitch gameplay. I also prefer Reach because every enemy has the same possibility to kill you. No weapon upgrades just cosmetic changes. I dont care about the gear and have spent maybe 25k credits and have played over 500 games since launch and every game is fantastic and have yet to be bored. I have a feeling im going to be playing Reach for a very, very long time.
I enjoy doubles arena and 4v4 even though 90% of my teammates are idiots.
COD4 is not close to MW2 in gameplay,MW2 is much more fast paced,it has a greater level of costumisation and many different things i have both and they are a huge step one from the other and MW2 is superior in pretty much anything to it.
On Halo is quiote the opossite for me having to hit some one 5 times in the head to kill it is a joke,shield just make it harder for rocket camper to be kill,in fact i was just playing a few days ago and a dude was rocket camping,on a part where he was hard to reach,he would hide every time you put some shots into him,and since it shield regen he keep up going,i finally got the dude with a sicky grenade because shooting him was close to impossible.
why didn't you use a sniper rifle and active camo? there's ways around every exploit. just because you couldn't find it doesn't mean the gameplay is flawed.[QUOTE="Fizzman"]
I played MW2 for about a month. It was exactly the same as MW and it was even more imbalanced (Which is incredible) then the original. Got up to lvl 50ish and couldn't stand the massive twitch gameplay. I also prefer Reach because every enemy has the same possibility to kill you. No weapon upgrades just cosmetic changes. I dont care about the gear and have spent maybe 25k credits and have played over 500 games since launch and every game is fantastic and have yet to be bored. I have a feeling im going to be playing Reach for a very, very long time.
I enjoy doubles arena and 4v4 even though 90% of my teammates are idiots.
Eltormo
COD4 is not close to MW2 in gameplay,MW2 is much more fast paced,it has a greater level of costumisation and many different things i have both and they are a huge step one from the other and MW2 is superior in pretty much anything to it.
On Halo is quiote the opossite for me having to hit some one 5 times in the head to kill it is a joke,shield just make it harder for rocket camper to be kill,in fact i was just playing a few days ago and a dude was rocket camping,on a part where he was hard to reach,he would hide every time you put some shots into him,and since it shield regen he keep up going,i finally got the dude with a sicky grenade because shooting him was close to impossible.
Rockets only have 4 shots, just don't go to where he's camping. Common sence.
I am currently burnt the hell out on shooters, but Reach was a real pleasure for me. That said, I will not be touching another FPS until next year. It's just too much and I need a break from them. It's going to be action, adventure and role playing games for me for the rest of the year.
Lol, you keep up bringing up Sony games trying to draw comparisons to them. Did you read the first post?Mega fail. Halo Reach will be far more popular than any PS3 game online for years to come. Have you ever looked at bungie.net? They show the numbers, even Halo 3 still has lots of players. Probably more than MAG for example.
mynamesdenvrmax
[QUOTE="Eltormo"]
[QUOTE="Fizzman"]
I played MW2 for about a month. It was exactly the same as MW and it was even more imbalanced (Which is incredible) then the original. Got up to lvl 50ish and couldn't stand the massive twitch gameplay. I also prefer Reach because every enemy has the same possibility to kill you. No weapon upgrades just cosmetic changes. I dont care about the gear and have spent maybe 25k credits and have played over 500 games since launch and every game is fantastic and have yet to be bored. I have a feeling im going to be playing Reach for a very, very long time.
I enjoy doubles arena and 4v4 even though 90% of my teammates are idiots.
Cloud567kar
COD4 is not close to MW2 in gameplay,MW2 is much more fast paced,it has a greater level of costumisation and many different things i have both and they are a huge step one from the other and MW2 is superior in pretty much anything to it.
On Halo is quiote the opossite for me having to hit some one 5 times in the head to kill it is a joke,shield just make it harder for rocket camper to be kill,in fact i was just playing a few days ago and a dude was rocket camping,on a part where he was hard to reach,he would hide every time you put some shots into him,and since it shield regen he keep up going,i finally got the dude with a sicky grenade because shooting him was close to impossible.
Rockets only have 4 shots, just don't go to where he's camping. Common sence.
And you can find more ammo for it,also we loss that one by a long shot it was close to impossible to get him,also rockets will go for distances not just 50 feet,so been far away from him did not really save you from getting kill.
I just thought there would be more playing teh game in general no matter what the sales are. I thought if u got a 360 this is the game to get atleast that is what everyone making it out to be. And if this is the case there should be alot more online.Santesyu
Contrary to popular belief the majority of people that buy games actually do not play the multiplayer all that often.... 2 million is a lot.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment